TLDR the article clearly states that Tesla misclassifies the severity of the accidents and redacts the narratives and disengagement data. Key sentence "Tesla has never released any significant data to prove that its system is reliable."

▲

guywithahat a day ago | parent [-]

I read the article, it's just that the data was never, and is not, hidden. Data for vehicles that aren't fully autonomous isn't released, and they are releasing their fully autonomous data through the proper channels.

At no point was tesla ever trying to "hide 3 robotaxi accidents", as the title claims (unless I'm missing something but I don't think I am)

▲

pitpatagain a day ago | parent [-]

Read the table of examples in the article. Other companies report crashes with significant detail visible to the public that Tesla is redacting.

Compare Waymo report:

"On [XXX] at 10:31 PM PT a Waymo Autonomous Vehicle ("Waymo AV") operating in San Francisco, California was in a collision involving a scooterist on [XXX] at [XXX].

The Waymo AV was stopped at the curb facing north on [XXX] for a passenger drop-off when the passenger in the Waymo AV opened the rear right door. As the rear right door was being opened by the passenger, a scooter ....

Waymo is reporting this crash under Request No. 2 of Standing General Order 2021-01. Waymo may supplement or correct its reporting with additional information as it may become available."

Tesla reports is:

"[REDACTED, MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION]"

Tesla has consistently tried to have it both ways saying they are "not autonomous" and therefore don't have to report, but also then claiming in other contexts that they are driving huge numbers of "autonomous" miles.

So now they finally do a handful of reports and it's all REDACTED? They are finally doing barely what's required but also not being forthcoming at all.

▲

guywithahat 12 hours ago | parent [-]

So to be very clear, the title

> Tesla is trying to hide 3 Robotaxi accidents

is strictly false. They reported the accidents and have done everything properly, you just don't like the way its formatted. Got it. I think your definition of the word hide is too different to come to a consensus.

▲

pitpatagain 12 hours ago | parent [-]

Change it to "Tesla is trying to hide the details of 3 Robotaxi accidents" then.

They have reported that accidents happened, and redacted all of what actually happened. It's very clear what the complaint is in the article despite how hung up on the headline you are.

▲

guywithahat 5 hours ago | parent [-]

Trying to hide, in this context, meaning "releasing public information about accidents according to NHTSA guidelines". If they had been more impactful accidents there would be more public information. If you think this isn't enough information for this kind of accident, blame the NHTSA

	▲	pitpatagain 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		They reported 3 accidents up to July 25 on a fleet of, at the time, 12 cars, doing barely any miles. No data is yet reported for August. The requirement is to report within 5 days, why are the reports happening now? It's actually quite shocking they had 3 to report so quickly of any severity with such a tiny program in Austin. The NHTSA has an active probe into Tesla for not following the reporting guidelines for their level 2 systems: https://apnews.com/article/tesla-crashes-self-driving-robota... Specifically that they haven't been reporting on time, months instead of the required days. "If they had been more impactful accidents there would be more public information." does not track with Tesla's history of reporting thus far. You can make excuses all you want for them but late reports + redacting information other companies do not reads loud and clear as "trying to hide something" to me, not "legit autonomous vehicle company that wants to establish reliability and safety to the public".